Legal Opinion

Jones v. Shale

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided February 19, 1889PublishedCited by 1 opinion

Appeal from the Monroe Circuit Court. — Hon. Thomas H. Bacon, Judge. The contract having been in custody of plaintiff and being offered in evidence by him, the endorsement thereon signed by him must be considered as in evidence also. This endorsement, notwithstanding the fact that by its terms, it purports to sell the corn to Hyatt & Burkholder, must, if it vests them with any rights, operate as a transfer of the contract by way of assignment.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the Monroe Circuit Court. — Hon. Thomas H. Bacon, Judge. The contract having been in custody of plaintiff and being offered in evidence by him, the endorsement thereon signed by him must be considered as in evidence also. This endorsement, notwithstanding the fact that by its terms, it purports to sell the corn to Hyatt & Burkholder, must, if it vests them with any rights, operate as a transfer of the contract by way of assignment. A right of action for damages arising upon the breach of the contract by either party would be assignable. But the contract itself, as long as…

1Opinion of the CourtRombauer, P. J.

This is an action to recover damages alleged to have been sustained by the plaintiff, by the defendants’s breach of a contract of sale. The contract sued on is •embodied in the petition and is filed herewith. It is in the following words:

“Clarence, Mo., Aug. 12, 1881.
“I this day sell to H. V. Jones, five thousand bushels of number two mixed corn, to be delivered in Clarence, Shelby county, Missouri, on or before the last day of April, 1882, for forty-five cents per bushel. And it is further agreed by me to put it in the cars shelled, if I remain in my present mill, at a reasonable price for…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Crawford v. SpencerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
  2. Kent v. MiltenbergerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1883
  3. Cockrell v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
  4. Teasdale v. McPikeMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. McCartney v. State InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API